Rapid Responses to:

EDUCATION AND DEBATE: Neil Francey and Simon Chapman "Operation Berkshire": the international tobacco companies' conspiracy BMJ 2000; 321: 371-374 [Full text]

Rapid Responses: Submit a response to this article

Rapid Responses published:

Mistaken suggestion

John Slade   (24 August 2000)

Mistaken suggestion 24 August 2000
John Slade, Professor Send response to journal: Re: Mistaken suggestion	Francey and Chapman (1) mistakenly suggest that Philip Morris has made an admission that cigarette smoking causes serious disease (their reference 35) when, in fact, the company has done no such thing. While the company's web site (2) indeed does say, "There is an overwhelming medical and scientific consensus that cigarette smoking causes lung cancer, heart disease, emphysema and other serious diseases in smokers," the opinion expressed is attributed to others. The company does not itself subscribe to this view. The company emphasized this point in its proxy statement to shareholders last March: On the issues of the role played by cigarette smoking in the development of lung cancer and other diseases in smokers, and whether nicotine, as found in cigarette smoke, is "addictive," the Company [has] stated that despite the differences that may exist between its views and those of the public health community, it would, in order to ensure that there will be a single, consistent public health message on these issues, refrain from debating the issues other than as necessary to defend itself and its opinions in the courts and other forums in which it is required to do so.(3) Others, including The New York Times (4) and the American Cancer Society (5), have also mistakenly concluded that Philip Morris has made an admission regarding causation when, in fact, the company has not done so. The company seems to be intent on fostering this misimpression since it has not publicly corrected the mistaken conclusions of the Times or the ACS. While the Philip Morris website also indicates that its customers and potential customers should "rely" on the scientific consensus of harm in making "decisions" about smoking, the company itself does not seem to rely on this consensus in deciding how to market its deadly, addictive products. Were it actually relying on this scientific consensus, one might expect advertising for Marlboro to consist entirely of efforts to help people stop smoking instead of enticements for them to use this poisonous product. Philip Morris seems unlikely to change its behavior towards its customers and potential customers until it is required to do so by governmental regulation. There is no evidence that the company has changed its fundamental positions at all, and we should not expect it to act in the public interest until it is compelled to do so. 1. Francey N, Chapman S. "Operation Berkshire": the international tobacco companies' conspiracy. BMJ 2000;321:371-374. (5 August.) 2. Philip Morris. Cigarette smoking. Health issues for smokers, 13 October 19899. www.philipmorris.com/tobacco_bus/tobacco_issues/health_issues.html (accessed 22 August 2000). 3. Philip Morris. Notice of annual meeting of stockholders Thursday, April 27, 2000 and proxy statement. New York: Philip Morris, 10 March 2000, page 36. 4. Editorial. New strategy at Philip Morris. The New York Times 4 March, 2000, page A-14. 5. American Cancer Society. Is Philip Morris serious or just blowing smoke? The New York Times 7 August, 2000, page A-5.